Your school systematically allowed little boys to be raped to protect the football program. Basically all the people in charge. So you are suggesting they don't punish the football program? So basically everything Paterno tried to do, would suceed?

I feel for you there but that makes no sense.

Maybe you missed the part where I said I agreed with half of the punishment. Don't flip this around like I don't think they shouldn't be punished.

I don't agree with the scholarships or the wins taken away, that's just silly to me for both reasons I explained. The bowl ban (which I agree with) dramatically affects the team in numerous ways. I think people aren't realizing the reality of this punishment alone. Even if they'd have their full scholarship amounts, they'd still have a harder time convincing players to come play for a team where they won't be able to shine on the biggest stage which is their respective bowl game and (possible) big ten title.

Why not, instead of the scholarships, impose a bigger fine that goes towards groups and individuals affected by sexual abuse. Make it 200 million. Make it so any money they'd profit off the bowl games be directly donated to some type of charity for victims of sexual abuse for four years? Wouldn't that do a hell of a lot more for the situation? Or is it better to deny scholarship opportunities for high school athletes (some of which wouldn't be able to make it there with their financial situation and/or grades)? I mean, the media, the public, they all pressed for this. They pressed for punishment because of the scandal. SCANDAL SCANDAL SCANDAL. That's all we've been hearing about, right? Why not make the punishment more geared towards building funds for programs? Tell me that doesn't make more sense? Emmert just wanted to beat his chest and show the power the NCAA granted him here. Congrats to him on the 'punishment' that he could have switched around to help make this situation ten times better for the victims. Because that's why he did it... for the victims.

Anyone watch outside the lines with him on it and some of the questions he didn't even know how to answer because what he laid out was absolutely retarded.

How is taking away scholarships fair? Who is it affecting that did any harm? How is it punishing Paterno, Sandusky, McQueery, Spanier? It isn't at all. And to deny the scholarships for high school kids who had nothing to do with this is pathetic. Not only does it make them not able to go to Penn State but who says that those kids even get the chance to play somewhere then on a scholarship? You can't hand out a scholarship to everyone. Missing scholarships from Penn State equals less opportunities for kids to play football. It's as simple as that.

And my final question, shouldn't the benefits provided by the punishments ultimately affect the victims/sexual abuse groups to the maximum and shouldn't the consequences directly affect those solely involved with this?